RP#3: Technology-Related Best Practices For All Students And Teachers

This week’s readings highlighted debates over the effectiveness of technology, the best ways to avoid the “digital divide”, and methods of facilitating a constructivist learning environment that welcomes the use of technology. The first two articles discuss different viewpoints on the use of technology as a learning tool.  

Richard E. Clark, “Reconsidering Research on Learning From Media” 

Richard E. Clark makes his opinions known through evidence gathered in his article, “Reconsidering Research On Learning From Media.”  Clark feels that forms of media such as TV and computers are “delivery devices” that have the potential to reduce instruction costs but not improve retention of information (446).  While Clark does admit that some media are used more efficiently for certain learners and sometimes temporarily increase learning if the user views the media as a “novelty”, he attributes authentic learning to good teaching methods (447).  Clark determines through research of case studies that media can be successful depending on how a teacher uses it and what they are teaching with it (449).  However, Clark insists that “the methods conveyed by the media... probably account for different levels of achievement....” (456).  

Robert B. Kozma, “Learning With Media” 

Robert B. Kozma feels that Clark’s stance on educational technology is wrong.  In his article, “Learning With Media”, Kozma reviews items such as books, TV, computers, and multimedia environments to determine their impact on learning.  After defining learning as the creation and storage of new meaning based on existing knowledge, Kozma explains that a learner’s environment, including media, impacts their thought process (180).  He concludes that it is possible for media to influence the way learners “represent and process information”, therefore possibly enhancing or changing conventional learning (179-180).  Kozma believes forms of media have the ability to facilitate the learning process and carry out tasks that the learner is not capable of (182).  The ways we decide to use media and factors such as age and prior knowledge also change how effective it is in helping us retain new information (181, 187).  Kozma gives examples of media we use in everyday life, such as a book.  He examines studies performed that compare the retention level of learners who read text with and without pictures.  While the reader who views pictures finishes the article faster, they did not retain as much information as the reader who read slower without pictures (186).  Kozma also highlights studies on the use of TV for educational purposes.  He agrees with Salomon’s conclusion that retention relies more on an individual’s amount of invested effort (AIME) rather than the ability of the media to perform educational services (190).  However, Kozma did find evidence that certain media may slow down processing for some learners if it provides information at a pace different from the learner’s pace (195).  Kozma wants to eliminate Clark’s idea that media and instructional method are separate entities, explaining that the two work together: Media can enable or restrict teaching methods, and teaching methods can inspire new uses of media (205). 

David H. Jonassen, “Thinking Technology”

In his article, “Thinking Technology”, David H. Jonassen explores the idea of constructivism as a successful approach to learning.  Constructivism involves learners “constructing their own reality” based on personal experiences and beliefs (35).  He admits that helping teachers design constructivist instructional methods is difficult because this learning theory is based upon the student’s individual needs (35).  It is difficult to find one way to service all learners since they have unique experiences and beliefs.  Jonassen explains that constructivist-style learning happens in environments that are hands-on and do not oversimplify instruction. The environment must support reflection and collaboration rather than competition (35).  Learning is largely initiated by the student through experimentation and interaction with others in the constructivist environment.  Jonassen purposely avoids providing an outline for constructivist instruction because the whole purpose of the constructivist learning style is to let the learner lead their own path.  Planning out a method of instruction and predicting possible outcomes for learning would go against the foundation of the constructivist education style (35). In an effort to help interested educators support a constructivist environment (which would be conducive to technology implementation), Jonassen suggests that the environment is more important than a specific sequence for learning (36).  He reiterates the fact that sharing, debating, use of prior knowledge, experimentation, reflection, case-based issues, problem solving, modeling of learning, and collaboration between the teacher and learner are all characteristics of various constructivist learning environments.  

Robin Chapman, Redefining Equity: Meaningful Uses of Technology In Learning Environments

Not to be confused with constructivism, Robin Chapman describes the constructionist educational theory as a method of learning through the creation of projects and sharing them with the community.  Engaging with others over content learned is expected to help students connect new concepts to existing knowledge and help learners become more self-motivated.  Constructionist styles as well as constructivism are very supportive of learning environments that include technology.  Chapman emphasizes that technology needs to be 1:1 in an effort to properly provide educational opportunities in a constructionist setting.  1:1 technology would also break down e the “Digital Divide” among students who have not previously had access to educational technology, or those populations that our culture deems less tech-saavy.  Chapman reminds readers that technology is only useful for educational purposes if it is used to “design, create, or share content that is culturally relevant and representative of [students’] views and values.” Students have to be encouraged to relate technology use and educational content to their personal experiences.  Teachers have to be willing to switch roles with students and allow students to share their incites.  Chapman believes providing more community technology centers (CTC’s) will help support students who do not typically have access to technology and increase the opportunity for learners to use computers and applications as tools for learning.  

Reflection

After reading these articles on the media debate, equitable technology, and constructivism/constructionism in the educational technology learning environment, I tend to relate most to Kozma.  Kozma generally believes that media and technology, when used in an educationally appropriate way, can be helpful to the learner (179).  However, he is not blind to the fact that sometimes media can slow down or limit processing.  While decreased learning pace is definitely a cause for concern, I start to wonder if this really is a huge problem or not.  If multimedia presentations using technology engage a learner and motivate them intrinsically to continue to absorb new knowledge, does it really matter if the rate of retention is slightly decreased?  Kozma also explains that he discovered through the analysis of studies that the learner usually presents the information they learned most successfully when using the same method they learned from (192).  In other words, if the student learns new information through a video, they might share their information best through a verbal or recorded presentation.  It appears to me that the success of technology in education is dependent on determining the individual’s best learning style to absorb, present, and express information.  

Both Kozma and Clark seem open to faults in their arguments, it is interesting that Clark is so adamant about the ineffectiveness of media in education.  After saying “media do not influence learning under any conditions”, he later admits that media does have the ability to temporarily increase learning if the learner views the media as a “novelty” (445, 450).  Based on this assumption, Clark’s conclusion that media does not typically influence learning might be proved wrong if the educator constantly seeks new media that the learner considers a “novelty”.  Tracking down novelty media could be relatively easy since technology is constantly evolving!  

In both Clark’s and Kozma’s arguments, it appears that allowing the learner some ownership over the media used in their learning process results in successful retention.  This evidence greatly supports Jonassen’s theory that constructivism is the most appropriate method for incorporating technology into core teaching.  However, it is still a rather unfulfilling conclusion to reach because the solutions for creating a constructivist classroom are rather vague.  As a teacher, it even seems confusing to write a lesson plan in the constructivist style because most lesson plan formats follow a sequence of events.  Constructivism does not want the instructional designer to predict the outcome of each event in the learning process, yet there needs to be some structure to learning that holds the instructor accountable for student progress.  As educators who use technology to improve classroom learning, we need to attempt to cut cultural stereotypes that might describe a person of a certain gender or socioeconomic background as less likely to use and succeed with technology.  Chapman says we need to provide students with 1:1 technology whenever possible to make learning equitable.  If some students do not have their own device, a computer lab is a great option to sustain equal opportunities for all.  Additionally, we need to allow students to explore a concept first before explaining it to them.  They need to be given an opportunity to share their ideas and design something (presentation, model, movie, etc.) that represents a culmination of their new knowledge.  If we follow these broad guidelines, constructivism can be a very productive environment for the successful use of technology in the classroom.